CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This chapter contains the background of the study, the research question, the

purpose, the scope, and the significance of the study.

1.1. Background of the Study

Task is a work or an activity that can help to accommodate the language

learning (Richards in Ellis, 2003, p. 4; Breen in Nunan, 2004, p. 3) in which it has

to achieve a particular outcome in the learning process (Ellis, 2003, p. 16). The

task also should carry out the purpose to deliver the learning in meaningful way

(Nunan, 1989, p. 10). Every task which is given in the classroom is integrated as a

part of learning activity, as proposed by Brown (2001, p. 129), learning activity is

a number of things that students perform in the classroom and undoubtedly task is

a part of it.

Further, Ur (1991, p. 21) described a learning task as a practice that contains

the activity to reinforce language skills and knowledge also that the learning task

concerns with process-oriented as it is occurred during the learning process. Ur

also explained that to introduce a learning task in the learning process, instructions

are given as guidance. Thus, the instruction is a key element of the teaching and

learning in the classroom as it can determine the high or low thinking level of

tasks employed (Doyle, 1983 in Benko, 2012, p. 8). Moreover, in English

language teaching and learning, the variety of task is broad that it can be range

from a simple grammar exercise to problem-solving activity and many other types

(Breen in Nunan, 2004, p. 3). It includes not only „drills‟ but also includes

reading, writing essays, communication activities, etc (Ur, 1991, p. 336).

Therefore, it can be concluded that task has important role in the teaching and

learning process as task is seen as a means to help the students to achieve the

expected learning outcome (Ellis, 2003, p. 16). By giving a task, it is assumed that

it can help teachers to accomplish the learning outcome also comprehend the

students to get better understanding and can mark students‟ arrival at the higher

learning process.

The Revised Bloom‟s Taxonomy, which was proposed by Bloom (1956) and

then was revised by Anderson and Krathwohl (2001), is the commonly used

taxonomy in the area of education. Two dimensions fall under the Revised

Bloom‟s Taxonomy are cognitive process dimension and knowledge dimension.

Cognitive process deals with the mastery of the subject matter being learnt also

the comprehension of the content. The cognitive process of Revised Bloom‟s

Taxonomy is used in this study since this taxonomy provides clear description and

example on each component. The levels in this taxonomy are Remember,

Understand, Apply, Analyze, Evaluate, and Create.

A number of studies have been conducted in exploring cognitive level in

learning. A content analysis study conducted by Assaly and Igbaria (2014)

analyzed the reading and listening activities in the textbook Master Class for 10th

–grade students studying English at the 5 unit level based on Bloom‟s Taxonomy.

This study was aimed at determining to what extent the activities in the reading

and listening units emphasize high and low-level thinking and the extent to which

the cognitive levels of the activities in the Mastering Reading and Mastering

Listening sections of the textbook Master Class varied.

A content analysis study from Sirait (2014) examined the comprehension

levels of reading exercises in Look Ahead 1, 2, and 3 English coursebooks using

Anderson and Krathwohl‟s Taxonomy. The purpose of this study is to evaluate

levels of comprehension of the reading exercises. Cassandra (2015) conducted a

case study that aimed to describe various type of task to accommodate the

students‟ domains of learning: cognitive, psychomotor, and affective to grade 7

students. The tasks were identified based on types of task analysis of QALLT

framework by Driessen, then categorized the tasks accommodated the domains of

learning.

Based on the discussion, this study was aimed to identify the cognitive levels

of the task employed in the classroom of grade XI at SMA Labschool

Rawamangun. This study utilizes the teachers‟ spoken instruction from recorded

video as the main data that would be analyzed in order to identify the learning

tasks that students engage. Instructions are categorized based on their cognitive

level proposed by Anderson and Krathwohl (2001).

1.2. Research Questions

Based on the background of the study, the research questions may arise:

1. What kinds of the cognitive level in the English learning task

employed?

1.3. Purpose of the Study

This study was aimed at portraying and describing the tasks given by the

teachers and then analyzing the tasks referring to the level of thinking based on

the Revised Bloom‟s Taxonomy.

1.4. Scope of the Study

This study focused on the learning tasks – whether it is in written or spoken

form and in which it can be range from simple grammar drills to problem solving

activity – employed in grade XI at SMA Labschool Rawamangun.

1.5. Significance of the Study

This study is expected to give contribution enriching the knowledge in the

area of thinking levels. Also, this research will be significant not only for writer,

but also for the teacher and other researcher. For the writer, conducting a study in

this area can foster her competence as a future English teacher.

For the teacher, this study can help them in considering the types of task

employed. Last, for other researchers, it is expected to give some information for

those who want to conduct a study about tasks.

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter discusses the theoretical review underlying the study. The theoretical

review will be synthesized to outline the theoretical framework used to conduct

the whole study.

2.1. Theoretical Review

2.1.1. Learning Tasks

The concept of task has been widely defined by many experts. Many

definitions and perspectives exist. Nunan (1989, p. 10) described task as a piece of

classroom work that focus on incorporating learners‟ grammatical knowledge by

involving them to utilize the target language.

On the other hand, Richards et al. (1985) as cited in Ellis (2003, p. 4)

defined task as an activity or action that is employed in order to processing or

understanding language. In line with Richards, Breen (1987) as cited in Nunan

(2004, p. 3) referred task to “a range of work plans which have the overall

purposes of facilitating language learning – from the simple and brief exercise

type, to more complex and lengthy activities such as group problem-solving or

simulations decision-making”. The perspective of Breen to use the term „work

plan‟ has underpinned Ellis to define „task‟ likewise. As Ellis (2003, p. 16) stated

that “a task is a work plan that requires learners to process language pragmatically

in order to achieve an outcome that can be evaluated in terms of whether the

correct or appropriate propositional content has been conveyed”.

From all definitions above it can be concluded that task is a work or an

activity that can help to accommodate the language learning (Richards in Ellis,

2003, p. 4; Breen in Nunan, 2004, p. 3) in which it has to achieve a particular

outcome in the learning process (Ellis, 2003, p. 16). The task also should carry out

the purpose to deliver the learning in meaningful way (Nunan, 1989, p. 10).

Furthermore, the variety of the types of task is broad that it can be range from a

simple grammar exercise to problem-solving activity and many other types (Breen

in Nunan, 2004, p. 3).

However, Ur (1991, p. 21) used the term a learning task in referring to a

practice that contains “the activity through which language skills and knowledge

are consolidated and thoroughly mastered”. Also, it is arguably as the most

important of all stages in learning as it does contribute significantly to successful

language learning. Moreover, Ur (1991, p. 336) believed that the learning task

concerns with process-oriented as it is occurred during the learning process – so

the focus is on the activity that the students do rather than on the product that

students do. Namely, Brown (2001, p. 129) who stated that activities of learning

occur when “virtually anything that learners do in the classroom or kinds of tasks

and practice activities employed in the classroom”. In other words, task is

integrated as a supporter of the learning process itself. Thus, it can be said that

English learning task is an activity employed to accommodate the learning of

English language.

Furthermore, Ur (1991, p. 21) stated that the tasks may relate to “any

aspect of language, for example: learning of a grammatical structure, the

improvement of listening, speaking, reading or writing fluency, or the

memorization of vocabulary”. So, task includes not only „drills‟ but also includes

reading, writing essays, communication activities, etc.

From those explanation, it can be concluded that the learning task is an

activity which given during the learning process with the purpose to enable the

students to reinforce the previous learned knowledge. Also, the task is not

particularly about an activity in written form but also activity in spoken form. In

short, this study focuses on every task occurs in the classroom that teachers give

during the learning process whether it is in written or spoken form and in which it

can be range from simple grammar drills to problem solving activity.

2.1.2. Taxonomy of Learning

Taxonomy of learning is commonly used as a way to identify different

stages of learning development and can be employed as a useful tool in

differentiating the appropriateness of particular learning process. Classifying

levels of thinking and kinds of knowledge can ease teachers‟ work for selecting

and choosing on what is to be learned and the way to deliver it. There are Bloom‟s

Taxonomy and Revised Bloom‟s Taxonomy.

Bloom‟s Taxonomy was made by Bloom et al. in 1956. Bloom‟s

Taxonomy divided the learning process into six levels of thinking process:

Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis, and Evaluation.

Bloom saw his taxonomy as more than a measurement tool that it can help to

achieve learning goals, and determine educational objectives. The categories were

ordered from simple to complex and from concrete to abstract.

In 2001, Anderson and Krathwohl published the revision of Bloom‟s

Taxonomy. This revised version allows teachers to align learning objectives and

assessment strategies (Anderson and Krathwohl, 2001, pp. 67-68). Thus,

Knowledge changed into Remember; Comprehension changed into Understand;

Application changed into Apply; Synthesis changed the place with Evaluation

which became Evaluate; and on the highest level became Create. The Revised

Bloom‟s taxonomy also made a change in its dimensional process. While the

original taxonomy only has one dimension, the revised taxonomy has two

dimensions; there are cognitive process dimension and knowledge dimension.

Thus, the Revised Bloom‟s Taxonomy is used in this study since this

taxonomy provides clear description and example on each component.

2.1.2.1. Cognitive Process Dimension

The categories in this dimension aimed to give a set of classification

of the cognitive processes. The cognitive processes are presented on the following

table.

Cognitive Process Definitions

1. Remember Retrieve relevant knowledge from long-term memory

1.1. Recognizing

1.2. Recalling

Locating knowledge in long-memory that is consistent

with presented material

Retrieving relevant knowledge from long-term memory

2. Understand Construct meaning from instructional messages,

including oral, written, and graphic communication

2.1. Interpreting

2.2. Exemplifying

2.3. Classifying

2.4. Summarizing

2.5. Inferring

2.6. Comparing

2.7. Explaining

Changing from one form of representation to another

Finding a specific example or illustration of a concept or

principle

Determining that something belongs to a category

Abstracting a general theme or major points

Drawing a logical conclusion from presented

information

Detecting correspondences between two ideas objects,

and the like

Constructing a cause-and-effect model of a system

3. Apply Carry out or use a procedure in a given situation

3.1. Executing

3.2. Implementing

Applying a procedure to a familiar task

Applying a procedure to a unfamiliar task

4. Analyze Break material into its constituent parts and determine

how the parts related to one another and to an overall

structure or purpose

4.1. Differentiating

4.2. Organizing

4.3. Attributing

Distinguishing relevant from irrelevant parts or

important from unimportant parts of presented material

Determining how elements fit or function within a

structure

Determining a point of view, bias, values, or intent

underlying presented material

5. Evaluate Make judgments based on criteria and standards

5.1. Checking

5.2. Critiquing

Detecting inconsistencies or fallacies within a process or

product; determining whether a process or product has

internal consistency; detecting the effectiveness of a

procedure as it being implemented

Detecting inconsistencies between a product and

external criteria; determining whether a product has

external consistency; detecting the appropriateness of a

procedure for a given problem

6. Create Put elements together to form a coherent or functional

whole/ reorganize elements into a new pattern or

structure

6.1. Generating

6.2. Planning

6.3. Producing

Coming up with alternative hypotheses based on criteria

Devising a procedure for accomplishing some tasks

Inventing a product

Table 2.1.2.1 Adapted from Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) pp. 67-68.

2.1.3. Instruction

Various definitions of instruction have been made by various experts.

They can be defined as the “teaching” itself (Gredler, 2009, p. 30); or it can also

be defined as the directions for students learning (Huitt, 2003; Ur, 1991, p. 16).

Gredler (2009, p. 30) presented the instruction in according with the

theories of learning, so the word instruction is broadly addressed as the general

“teaching”. However, instructions that will be focused in the study are not the

“broad version” as such but instruction in the literal meaning which is

“statement that describes how to do something” (Merriam-Webster dictionary,

2016). This definition of instruction involved the cases when teachers direct the

students into learning activities or tasks by explaining the expected outcome,

what the students have to do in the activity, what procedures and strategies in

order to complete the task, and others which are all related with instructional

events. Due to those instructional events, instructions are most likely to consist

of directions and orders. This is in line with Huitt (2003) which defined

instruction as “the purposeful direction of the learning process”. Further,

instruction is classified as the major teacher class activities that designed to

produce classroom learning.

Another definition comes from Ur (1991, p. 16) who defined that

instructions are seen as “the directions that are given to introduce a learning task

which entails some measure of independent student activity”. Those were

supported by Watson (2008, p. 26) who argued the definition of instruction as a

series of directives that are possibly combined with explanations in order to get

students to do something. Therefore, it can be concluded that teacher‟s

instruction is a series of purposeful direction during teaching learning process.

Moreover, Richards and Renandya (2002, p. 21) stated that teacher‟s

instructions in the classroom are guided by a preplanned curriculum. It means

that instructions are given in order to achieve the objectives stated in the

curriculum. In short, the instruction given by the teacher is a key element of the

teaching and learning in the classroom. Further, in this study, the instructions

are analyzed as the data to identify the task or the activity employed by the

students.

2.1.4. Previous Studies

A number of studies have been conducted in exploring cognitive level in

learning. A content analysis study conducted by Assaly and Igbaria (2014)

analyzed the reading and listening activities in the textbook Master Class for 10th

–grade students studying English at the 5 unit level based on Bloom‟s Taxonomy.

This study was aimed at determining to what extent the activities in the reading

and listening units emphasize high and low-level thinking and the extent to which

the cognitive levels of the activities in the Mastering Reading and Mastering

Listening sections of the textbook Master Class varied. The results showed that

114 activities emphasized levels of cognition representing lower order thinking

skills, while only 59 activities emphasized the three higher order thinking skills.

The activities in the Master Class textbook place a great deal of emphasis upon

comprehension.

Moreover, another content analysis study from Sirait (2014) examined

the comprehension levels of reading exercises in Look Ahead 1, 2, and 3 English

coursebooks using Anderson and Krathwohl‟s Taxonomy. The purpose of this

study is to evaluate levels of comprehension of the reading exercises. The results

revealed that more than 70% reading exercises in the series of Look Ahead are

presented to achieve the lower- cognitive level of the reading taxonomy. While,

there are less than 30% reading exercises presented in the course books to achieve

the higher- cognitive level of the reading taxonomy.

Cassandra (2015) conducted a case study that aimed to describe various

type of task to accommodate the students‟ domains of learning: cognitive,

psychomotor, and affective to grade 7 students. Classroom observation containing

note taking and recording on teacher and students activities were used to get the

primary data. School files consisting of lesson plans and teaching materials also

the interview with the teacher were analyzed to support the main data. The tasks

were identified based on types of task analysis of QALLT framework by

Driessen, then categorized the tasks accommodated the domains of learning. This

study showed – from the six meeting with total 26 tasks – that in cognitive

domain, the teachers focused on accommodating the students‟ understanding

towards the learning topic. In psychomotor domain, the result showed that the

teachers focused on giving the students opportunity in trying the target language.

While in affective domain, the teacher focused on leading the students to obey

provided task.

The studies in exploring cognitive level of the exercises in the textbook

have been already done by some researchers. Also, the study that explores the

variety of task in three domains of learning has been conducted. Yet, the study

that focuses in investigating the students‟ level of thinking from the tasks has not

been done previously. For that reason, this study is worth to be conducted.

2.2. Theoretical Framework

This study aims to describe the students‟ level of thinking enabled by task.

The reason task has been chosen by the writer is because the task can become a

tool to accommodate the language learning as proposed by Richards in Ellis

(2003, p. 4) and Breen in Nunan (2004, p. 3). Doyle (1983 as cited in Benko,

2012, p. 8) argues that a task includes both the level of cognitive demand and the

instruction provided; a task may begin at a high cognitive level, but then it is

reduced by a teacher‟s instruction, whether intentionally or not.

It means that teacher‟s instruction can foster students‟ thinking as it provides

direction and guidance for students in doing such cognitively demanding learning

task or activity (Huitt, 2003; Ur, 1991). Also, it can set up and maintain the

cognitive demand of a task or an activity (Doyle, 1983 in Benko, 2012). Thus, the

teachers‟ instruction plays a role that it can help to promote students‟ level of

thinking or vice versa.

Therefore, to identify the comprehension of the tasks employed, the writer

wants to analyze the level of thinking of the learning tasks – that are derived from

teachers‟ spoken instruction – referring to Revised Bloom‟s Taxonomy. Revised

Bloom‟s Taxonomy can be used to classify the instructional and learning activities

used to achieve the objectives, as well as the assessments employed to determine

how well the objectives were mastered by the students (Krathwohl, 2002: p. 217).

The level of thinking includes remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing,

evaluating, and creating.

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter provides the organization of research methodology which

focuses on answering research questions. It is divided into five sub-chapters

which consist of the research method, the time and place of study, data and data

sources, instrument of the study, data collection procedure and data analysis

procedure. The explanation of each part is presented below.

3.1. Research Method

The purpose of this study is to analyze kinds of the cognitive levels presented

in the tasks. Since this study engages with portraying, describing, and analyzing,

the design of this research is qualitative research. Cresswell (2007, p. 40) argued

that qualitative research is used when detailed understanding of the issue is

needed. Furthermore, descriptive study with data analysis is chosen as the method

of this study. As Borg and Gall (1989, p. 290) proposed that descriptive study is

aimed to describe, explain, and interpret conditions of the present by particularly

answering „what is‟ question. Thus, the writer finds descriptive study as the most

suitable research method to be applied.

3.2. Time and Place of the Study

This study is conducted from April to May 2016 with total 6 classes of grade

XI in SMA Labschool Rawamangun, Jakarta.

3.3. Data and Data Sources

The main data of this study is the learning tasks – whether it is in written or

spoken form and in which it can be range from simple grammar drills to problem

solving activity – that students do during the teaching and learning process as

noted from the transcription of the teachers‟ spoken instruction that were collected

to see how the tasks are given to the students. The supporting data is the content

of lesson plan and teaching materials.

3.4. Instrument of the Study

Cresswell (2007, p. 38) stated that qualitative researchers typically gather

multiple sources of data, such as interviews, observations, and documents, rather

than rely on a single data source. This study utilizes the data through: classroom

observation and document analysis.

3.4.1. Classroom Observation

Observation is carried out to collect information about the way tasks

are given. The role of the writer is the non-participant researcher with the

stance as complete observer since the writer just gathered the data without

being involved in the classroom. As Cresswell (2009, p. 179) said that

complete observer is the researcher who observes without participating.

Also, Ary et al. (2010, p. 433) stated that complete observer made no attempt

to alter the situation in any way. Therefore, the writer simply observes and

records the events as they occur.

3.4.2. Document Analysis

Ary et al. (2010, p. 442) suggested that qualitative researchers may

use written documents to gain an understanding of the phenomenon under

study. The document analyzed in this study is the lesson plans and teaching

materials used by the teachers. The documents were collected to cross-check

and support the main data.

3.5. Data Collection Procedure

The steps employed by the writer to collect the data:

1. Observing and recording the classroom activities in grade XI.

The data that obtained from this step were teacher‟s spoken instruction in

giving the task. Those were recorded in the videotape to assist the writer

in making the transcriptions.

2. Making transcription of the recorded data.

The recorded data of the teaching and learning activities were transcribed

into a written text to make the analysis easier.

3. Copying the lesson plans and teaching materials.

This was done to gain information about the objectives stated in the

lesson plan which is set for each task or activity.

3.6. Data Analysis Procedure

The data was analyzed into two groups. The data from classroom observation

was analyzed based on the Cognitive Process Dimension of Revised Bloom‟s

Taxonomy, whereas the data from document analysis was used to strengthen and

cross-check the data gained in the classroom observation. The data are analyzed

under these following procedures:

1. Transcribing and describing the teacher spoken instruction from the

recorded video of what students are supposed to do in each task.

Extract 1:

For now, you don’t need to determine the main points for every sentence.

You only need to determine main points and summary for each

paragraph. Okay?

2. Noting each tasks given by the teachers.

3. After describing the instructions in the step 1, the writer finds what

learning activities that students engaged before doing the tasks and to

make sure those were the learning activities the students engaged, the

writer matches lecturers‟ instruction with the list of tasks in step 2.

4. Analyzing level of cognitive processes in the tasks based on the Revised

Bloom‟s Taxonomy (Anderson and Krathwohl, 2001).

Meeting Instruction Task

Cognitive Processes

Rem

ember

Un

der

stan

d

Ap

ply

An

aly

ze

Ev

aluat

e

Cre

ate

1st Determine main points and

summary for each paragraph

Summarize the text X

5. Identifying the statements in the lesson plans and teaching materials to

support the findings from tasks analysis.

6. The writer discussed the findings.

7. Drawing conclusions.

CHAPTER IV

FINDING AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presents finding and discussion of the study about level of cognitive

processes enabled by the English learning tasks in grade XI.

4.1. Data Description

This study was aimed to figure out the cognitive processes of the learning

tasks referring to Anderson & Krathwohl (2001). This chapter outlines finding

and discussion in regards to the research question: “What kinds of cognitive level

on the English learning tasks employed?” The data taken for this study to answer

the research question is teachers‟ spoken instructions and supported by lesson

plan. Below are the examples of the data obtained:

A. Teachers‟ spoken instruction

So, what you need to do, you have to revise your final revised version previously.

My suggestion for you, you can try to compress your works of an essay that you

did two weeks ago into 300 words essay. You can compress right away from your

previous revision or you can refer to the original article. I think it’s much better if

you refer to the original article to compress it again, but now, it’s not 500 words,

but 300 words.

B. Lesson plan

RENCANA PELAKSANAAN PEMBELAJARAN

Nama satuan pendidikan : SMA Labschool Jakarta

Mata pelajaran : Bahasa Inggris

Kelas/Semester : XI/2

Materi pokok : Teks Naratif

Alokasi waktu : 6 x 45 menit

The complete data can be found in appendix 1 which is transcriptions obtained

from classroom observation and appendix 2 which is lesson plan and teaching

materials.

4.2. Data Analysis

To analyze and identify the cognitive processes in each task, the researcher

noted the teachers‟ instruction from recorded video as well as learning objectives

stated in lesson plan to identify the tasks and put the result in table analysis to be

categorized based on the cognitive processes in Revised Bloom‟s Taxonomy.

Meeting Instruction Tasks

Cognitive Processes

Rem

emb

er

Un

derst

an

d

Ap

ply

An

aly

ze

Eva

lua

te

Crea

te

1st Next I would like to make like the exposition text. Guys, now,

try to find one story whether it

is in fable, legend, myth, or related to narrative text and just

make like we have done before.

Try to find one story. Write the story and then submit it for

today. What you have to do

next? Find the generic structure.

Find a narrative text and write down in the piece of

paper

X

Complete data analysis can be found in appendix 3

4.3. Finding

4.3.1. The cognitive level on the learning tasks

The researcher summed up that from 5 meetings, total of learning tasks

given through the teachers‟ instructions is 15 tasks ranging from the lowest level

of thinking “remembering” to the highest level “create”. Tasks categorized in

remembering level occurred in 20%, understanding 40%, applying 7%, analyzing

20%, evaluating 7%, and creating 6%. The result showed that the teacher mostly

focused on constructing students‟ understanding and tried to recall students‟

memory of the previous learned knowledge also to determine the important pieces

of information.

In order to make the reader easier to follow the explanation, more elaboration of

level of thinking enabled in each tasks will be explained below.

1. Remember

The remember level is gained when the tasks asked the students to

understand and recognize the material which is suitable with the one that

have been taught, or when they have to retrieve the memory to define a

terminology.

Extract 1:

T : Next I would like to make like the exposition text. Guys, now, try

to find one story whether it is in fable, legend, myth, or related to

narrative text and just make like we have done before. Try to find

one story. Write the story and then submit it for today. What you

have to do next? Find the generic structure.

Remember 20%

Understand 40%

Apply 7%

Analyze 20%

Evaluate 7%

Create 6%

The cognitive level on the English learning tasks

The topic above is about narrative text. As the students were asked to find

a narrative text, the underlying instruction of this task that the students had

to recognize which text is included as part of narrative. So, based on the

analysis, it can be seen that cognitive level here is categorized as

remember.

2. Understand

The understand level is stimulated when the tasks asked the students to be

able to exemplify the material or when they are asked to grab the main

point of the paragraph. If they can do so, it marks that they are able to

construct the knowledge in their mind.

Extract 2:

T : Guys, listen up! For those who performed last week, the next that

will be discussed will be topic about riddle. Like example what

flower grows between your nose and chin?

S1 : Mouth?

T : Mouth? Flowers kok mouth. Raflessia Arnoldi if you haven’t

brush your teeth. But that’s not the answer. Where is your chin?

S2 : Tulips??

T : Ya, two lips.

S2 : Why? Why tulips?

T : That’s riddle. Then you don’t know. Now you know. Next, you

will. Aa.. We have to find more about riddles. Guys, look it up

with your hand phone, your internet. Find definitions of riddle.

Give me ten examples.

The topic above is about riddles. It can be seen that cognitive level here is

categorized as remember and understand level as the teacher asked to find

definition and examples of riddles. Yet, to be able to find definition and

examples, the students had to understand the conceptual knowledge about

riddles first. Thus, the teacher guided the students to make them

understand by exemplifying the material that is going to be learnt.

3. Apply

The apply level is activated when the tasks asked the students to use

procedures to perform exercises. The students have to know the proper

way to apply the procedure so then they can determine what knowledge to

solve the problem.

Extract 3:

T : Guys, about the storytelling, you don’t need to tell all the aaa..

whole story, No. It’s just like you tell us or you retell the

experience. Remember your super long holiday last week. So you

know what, you know what you have done right at that time. Today

it’s just like you are going to retell the experience you got by

reading the book or reading the text or reading the story. The

experience you got now you retell again to us. That’s the idea of

storytelling. You have a story to tell. You do not memorize that.

Why do you think I have to tell you to write eh sorry to read and to

find your own story because I believe that’s your favorite one.

The topic above is about narrative text. The students were going to

perform the story in front of the text. There, the teacher guided the

students the way to retell story. It can be concluded that cognitive level

enabled here is categorized as apply, as the students executed the way they

applied to do storytelling.

4. Analyze

The analyze level is fostered when the tasks asked the students to check on

their works or when differentiating important from unimportant

information of the text.

Extract 4:

T : So, now, hello? I want you to have this again. If previous we have

already, hmm, rhyme ya and I believe some of you get confused of

that. So now you have this. You work in pairs. Hello? Write it on

the piece of paper work in pairs of this. You have to write down.

You have to determine the points of every sentence first. If you

still remember the points the things that we did on the last activity

with ‘the coins’’, we determine the points of each sentence, right?

This is the same on how to do it. Can someone read the first line?

The students were going to determine the main ideas of the text. In doing

that task, students have to analyze which one the important and which one

are not.

5. Evaluate

The evaluate level is stimulated when the tasks asked the students to judge

or assess works based on criteria given.

Extract 5:

T : There are 4 criteria here. I’m going to explain are by one and

how to scale it. I think, you know, I have already used the scale 1

to 5 since you are in 10th

grade. I’ll try to reflect it again. So first,

what you need to do, you compare, the writing of your friends with

the original article. Okay that is why I asked you to upload the

original article. Second. Hello? Listen, ladies and gentlemen.

Second, you have to check these four criteria. First, the rephrase

of the vocabulary here. You have to check whether they rephrase it

with their own word or they merely copy paste from it. Okay?

The students were asked to check their friend‟s work based on the 4

criteria given. The evaluating level is promoted as the tasks asked the

students to evaluate the suitability of the works with the standard. So, it

can be seen that cognitive level enabled here is categorized as evaluate.

6. Create

The create level is enabled when the tasks asked the students to produce

their own synthesis of information to form it as a new one.

Extract 6:

T : So, what you need to do, you have to revise your final revised

version previously. My suggestion for you, you can try to

compress your works of an essay that you did two weeks ago into

300 words essay. You can compress right away from your previous

revision or you can refer to the original article. I think it’s much

better if you refer to the original article to compress it again, but

now, it’s not 500 words, but 300 words.

The students were asked to make their own essay based on the article. It‟s

not something new that they create, but they have to synthesis the article to

their own words. Therefore, the creating level promoted here.

From the samples of the tasks given through teachers‟ spoken instructions,

it can be concluded that cognitive levels on the learning tasks lies in the area of

remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating. In

order to activate remembering level, the tasks in which to recognize whether the

new information related to the previously learned knowledge are given. While in

understanding level, the students are asked to provide an evidence of the prior

knowledge. In applying, the tasks asked the students to perform the given task.

Furthermore, analyzing level and evaluating level go along each other as students

are asked to analyze and make a judgment or evaluation. Then, in order to enable

creating level, the task in which to synthesis the information is given. Also,

another finding from the observation that the tasks were mostly provided by

material from teachers and were barely using material from textbook.

4.4. Discussion

As mentioned previously in chapter two, task is a work or an activity that can

help to accommodate the language learning. Based on the findings, it can be seen

that those tasks carried out that purpose. The tasks are given as an exercise in

order to deliver better understanding to the students. This study covered two

topics: narrative text, and summary also riddles and proverbs as additional topics.

Therefore, the data related to tasks were limited to five meetings.

By doing various tasks, the teachers were trying to guide the students to

achieve the learning objectives. Based on the lesson plan, the learning objective

that the students expected to achieve in learning narrative text was to be able to do

a monologue of narrative text in front of the class. The learning objective in

learning summary was to be able to create an essay based on the given article.

These learning objectives were achieved through the learning activities that the

students did – in this case the tasks.

Before asking the students to do the monologue of narrative text properly,

the teachers started by exposing some examples of narrative text also its generic

structure and playing a video of someone did storytelling. The teacher then asked

the students to find a narrative text on the internet and identify the generic

structure. This task is used to accommodate the learning objective which is to

make the students know the narrative text and its generic structure. In finding the

narrative text and identifying its generic structure, students‟ level of thinking

enabled in the area of remembering and understanding since they should relate

what they have learned to find an example of it. Meanwhile, by exposing a video

of storytelling, the students were asked to perform the narrative text they have

found and this task is used to accommodate the learning objective which is to

make students to be able to do the monologue. Therefore in performing the

monologue, level of applying is also activated as the tasks asked the students to

apply the memory of retelling the story from the watched video.

Based on the example above, it can be seen that each task carried out

different purpose or learning objective that were later in the end of the learning

process resulted as the outcomes of students. Revised Bloom‟s Taxonomy can be

used to classify the instructional and learning activities used to achieve the

objectives, as well as the assessments employed to determine how well the

objectives were mastered by the students (Krathwohl, 2002: p. 217).

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION

This chapter presents the conclusion that was based on the finding and discussion

section. The implication and recommendation were presented to bring some

suggestions related to the pedagogical practices and further research.

5.1. Conclusion and Implication

Based on the findings and discussions, all the cognitive process were found

on the learning tasks that driven by lecturer‟s instruction. The researcher found

that there are 15 tasks which consists of 3 tasks on remember level (20%), 6 tasks

on understand level (40%), 1 task on apply level (7%), 3 tasks on analyze level

(20%), 1 task on evaluate level (7%), and 1 task on create level (6%).

Furthermore, total 67% of learning tasks on three levels of low order thinking and

33% of learning tasks on three levels of high order thinking. Learning activities –

including the tasks – often involve both lower order and higher order thinking

skills. Therefore, considering and determining those are teachers‟ job that has to

be well prepared.

With the findings and discussion displayed before, it can be concluded that all

six thinking level of Revised Bloom‟s Taxonomy were found on the learning

tasks. These were in line with the assumption that by giving a task, it can help the

students to get better understanding and foster their thinking skill. In short, tasks

have important role in the teaching and learning process as task is seen as a means

to help the students to achieve the expected learning outcome. Task in the learning

process also can be helpful to build up and develop students‟ prior knowledge and

can guide students to comprehend the learning material.

5.2. Recommendation

The recommendation for the teachers that teach grade XI students is to

consider the level of thinking carefully. As from the result that the most dominant

level occurred is understand level whereas the grade XI students are expected to

be exposed more in high order level of thinking. As for next English Department

students, who will conduct study particularly concerning on the learning task in

the classroom, is to do the observation longer so that maybe there will be pattern

appeared. Hence, another research in the area of task that might be conducted is to

gain deeper information focusing on how is the type of knowledge fostered by

task or students‟ perception toward task.